"The only qualification is that people elect him to be the president."
Sadly the exact same criteria that got Trudeau in, in '68.....:lol::lol:
Sadly the exact same criteria that got Trudeau in, in '68.....:lol::lol:
She had more credentials on paper than Obama had when he won the Presidency. As I have said before, I do not think she will run in 2012, but she is keeping some worried.With so many posts about Palin's candidacy for President in 2012, I am curious as to what it is that makes so many people consider her to have credentials qualitying her for president above anyone else. Anyone have answers? Yukon Jack?
Those qualifications do not qualify her to be the president, YJ. As TenPenny said (and I posted my post without reading his), the sole qualification (other than the trivial ones, he/she much be 35 years old, citizen of USA, born in USA etc.) to become a president is that people must elect you.
She had more credentials on paper than Obama had when he won the Presidency. As I have said before, I do not think she will run in 2012, but she is keeping some worried.
That's a common problem these days across all segments of society. Far too many jobs are being filled by the best candidate "on paper"- which most of the time means diddly squat. A heavy duty mechanic is filled by the guy who sends his resume in, in the cleanest envelope................................:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:
I understand Joe the Plumber was not even a good plumber. Why would he be a good president?
Was he even a plumber? There are a lot of was he questions going around about President Obama also. In answer to your question: Why not.
... and Reagan in '80, 84, Bush in '88, and Bushwacko in 2000, 2004.
I understand Hussain Obama was a lousy community organizer and an incompetant Senator on both the state and federal level. So, why would anyone in their right mind think that he would make good president. Obviously, more and more people realize this and the inevitable 'buyer's remorse' is setting in.
And Clinton's success was very largely due to a Republican House. Don't forget that all spending is controlled by the House of Representatives.
I watched both videos and could not find a reference to Koch preferring Palin over Obama.
I also noted that Mr. Koch was disappointed in Obama because he had a year to solve the problems of Al Qaida, North Korea, and Iran and failed to so. Let me understand this? Does Mr. Koch actually think that problems Clinton and Bush could not solve in 16 years could be solved by Obama in one?